Rise in defamation cases driven by new media

The UK has seen a 23 per cent increase in the number of reported defamation cases in the last year, according to research carried out by Thomson Reuters.

The growth in the number of reported defamation cases, up from 70 to 86, is partly due to a sharp rise in claims brought over defamatory material published online.

The number of cases relating to 'new media' in 2013/14, such as internet-only news services, social media, text messages and online review sites, more than quadrupled, rising from 6 to 26.

Many cases can be brought against the individuals responsible for creating the defamatory material, who are unaware of the potential legal implications of their actions, rather than against the websites hosting the content. High profile examples of this include the defamation claim against Sally Bercow after her now infamous tweets concerning Lord McAlpine.

Keith Mathieson, head of media at RPC, said: "The increase in claims arising from content on social media and websites reflects the growing impact and importance of new media compared with traditional news providers.

"Many of the new media cases are taken against the individuals responsible for the publications rather than companies such as Google or Twitter that host the material, as those companies are likely to have special hosting defences, particularly if they take material down following an initial complaint."

Mathieson added: "The increase in actions over internet-based communications is a reflection of people's concerns about their online reputations and the ease with which damaging information about individuals and businesses can be shared and spread."

The last three years have also seen a rise in reported defamation cases brought by businesses. The number of cases has climbed from 16 in 2011/12 to 31 in 2013/14, and includes defamatory claims published through email and social media as well as traditional media publications.

A recent and high-profile example was the undefended libel claim launched by listed legal services company Quindell against Gotham City Research. This came after the US-based analyst questioned the accuracy of its financial statements, which led to a sharp fall in Quindell's share price. Quindell claimed the note contributed to a £900m fall in its stock market valuation.

However, Mathieson believes that in cases where demonstrating serious financial loss from a comment is not clear cut, the new Defamation Act will make it more difficult for companies to bring defamation actions.

"Although the last year shows an increase in the number of businesses taking action for defamation, that trend is likely to be reversed during the next 12 months as the new Defamation Act will make it more difficult for companies to bring such actions because of the need to show serious financial loss."

Keith Mathieson continued: "The new provisions are almost wholly untested. It is inevitable that litigation will be required to determine the meaning and scope of the new provisions, but the high costs and risks of bringing a claim or defending one all the way through the courts mean there is unlikely to be a queue of people lining up to be guinea pigs.

"Businesses will be looking at other ways of managing the risk of adverse online publicity such as electronic monitoring and enhanced understanding of how search engines operate."

John van der Luit-Drummond is legal reporter for Solicitors Journal